About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
carthyism and this weird unconnectedness, attacking chuck hagel, for example, because no one will give us info or anyone info about the benghazi situation even though hagel wasn't even in the government when benghazi happened. sick stuff. and it seems to be growing in inverse proportion to obama's popularity. the better he looks, the worse these characters, inhofe, cruz, mccain, and lindsey graham, are determined to look. did you notice the smile on john boehner's face sitting up there behind the president during the state of the union? if you did, you're imagining things. so afraid of the hard hating right of republicans these days of every stripe, even boehner's scared to death of looking like he might like something barack obama had to say. to do that is to risk political death in these days. let's go at it. our guests are joy reid of the grio and michael steele, former chairman of the republican national committee. both are msnbc analysts and good ones. let's take a look at this. is this delay on the hagel vote about playing for time hoping new information comes out about them? "the new york times"
-level officers and enlisted that are so important to the leadership of our military and chuck hagel's leadership and commitment will be critical to that task. i have met with chuck hagel privately, i've asked him tough questions about iran and israel. i'm satisfied on those points that he will advise the president in according to with -- in accord with those policies but even more important i am struck by his passion, the intensity of his commitment to our men and women in uniform. his caring about them is indicated in so many ways. spontaneously and strongly in his testimony, as well as his private conversations. he will make sure that sexual assault in the military, the epidemic and scourge of rape and assault against men and women who serve and sacrifice for this country will be stopped, that there will be, in fact, zero tolerance not only in word but in deed. and his viewing, for example, of the documentary "invisible war," his understanding that this kind of misconduct is an outrage never to be even implicitly condoned and to be treated as a criminal offense, the most extreme kind of predat
. republicans launched a filibuster to stop the vote and former senator chuck hagel to serve in the president's cabinet. a new vote is scheduled in 11 days. what you think about the gop's efforts and mr. hagel 'snomination? nomination?s here are the numbers -- online.also find us send us a tweet @cspanwj. here are the headlines in the morning papers. the washington times -- this is the headline in the baltimore sun -- have line in "roll call -- the headline in "roll call" -- meredith shiner joins us. how unusual is it to have the president's pick for defense secretary block at this stage? guest: it has never happen before. a senate has never filibustered the president's pick for defense secretary. the most bizarre thing, and the thing that is most frustrating to people watching this outside washington, is that a former senator hagel is a former -- is a former republican. with 58 bouts, and the reason why it was 58 was because majority leader harry reid had to switch his vote to know to bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recess. you have a lot of republican senators
on television. today in a 58-40 cloture voted. they blocked chuck hagel being the sex -- secretary of defense. next the hour long debate on the nomination. they said they will not vote for cloture today, i think it's too bad. there's been more than enough time to read the additional speeches that have been coming in. the argument raced beyond that i know has do with the payment an equity fund that was received has been fully explained. as a highly reputable fund that senator hagel was an adviser to like many other reputable people. i think the continuation what amounts to filibuster is too bad when there's a secretary of defense who is leafing to go back to california. we need to have our new secretary of defense in place given the circumstances in this world. we have a budget crisis in this country, our scwesser is confronting us. that's sequester will have a damaging effect on the deference department, on the men and women in uniform. and on the programs, the equipment, the training that they need to be ready for any kind of contingency. so the delay in having a vote on cloture, to me is a
nothing about the personal compensation chuck hagel received in 2008, 2009 or 2010. we do not know, for example, if he receives compensation for giving paid speeches at extreme for radical groups. given the two letters he received, it is a fair inference to assume that he and those handling his nomination assembled that information, assembled his compensation, and the only reasonable inference i think is when they a symbol that there was something in there that they did not want to make public. it may be that he spoke at radical or extreme groups are anti-israel groups and accepted financial compensation. we don't know. it may be that he received extraordinary payments from defense contractors, which i would suggest as a matter of conflict of interest. this committee and the senate would be interested in. we don't know what it was because he simply said no. i will not tell you the compensatcompensat ion i personally have received. and i will point out on this question, i agree with senator harry reid. when it came to the nomination of john bold, and in a of members of this body ask
. on their face i don't expect the senate to reject mr. brennan for cia chief, and despite mr. hagel's troubles in the confirmation hearing, i don't expect he will be blocked as a matter of substance or his performance in the hearings. but it is true that if a couple of senators decide to hold things up because they want more answers, it gives the administration a choice. it can either go to bat against the republicans and say they're being unreasonable, they're being political, they need to back down, or they could make a decision we just want to get this thing through, let's try to give them enough information to satisfy them and get it over with. jon: a mouthpiece for the administration in this situation said these are critical national security positions, and individual members -- meaning senators -- shouldn't play politics with their nominations. but isn't that what happens at every nomination, the senators trot out their list of wants, you know, information wise from the administration and use some leverage? >> yes, i mean -- well, jon, that's what advise and consent ultimately means. it
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)